Cycling Nutrition: Solo Bar Vs. PowerBar

First came the carb craze, then protein got all fashionable-like, and now, with the Solo, we have another emerging trend: the low-glycemic-index bar. We put the Solo up against an ol' standby, the PowerBar, to find out what's better for us mountain bikers.

Advertisement

Bicycling Newsletters

The glycemic index refers to how quickly a food is broken down into sugar and enters your bloodstream. According to a brand-new study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, high-glycemic-index foods are associated with nasty stuff like type 2 diabetes, cancer and heart disease. "When carbohydrates rapidly turn to glucose in the bloodstream, your insulin rises really fast," explains James Stevens, professor of sports nutrition at Colorado's Metro State College of Denver. "That seems to set into motion a series of negative pathways that leads to disease." There's another factor at play. "Lower-glycemic foods give you a greater sense of fullness," says Stevens. "That's good at meal and snack times, but not so good when you're exercising." That's why he recommends the PowerBar for on-bike noshing. It has slightly less fiber (3 grams versus 4) and half the fat (3.5 grams versus 7) of the Solo bar, which helps usher the carbohydrates into your muscles as quickly as possible. But if you're looking for an off-bike snack, Stevens is all over the Solo. "If you're not exercising or recovering from a ride, the PowerBar can spike your blood sugar in a way that'll leave you feeling hungry. The Solo isn't going to do that."

Finally, Stevens offers another warning on the PowerBar, in light of recent nutrition research. "I'm a little concerned that the PowerBar has 40 percent of daily iron in the presence of 100 percent of daily vitamin C, which actually improves iron uptake. This can be a problem for men, who don't often need iron supplementation and can actually suffer from iron overload."